So this is the new rallying cry, is it? “No men in women’s bathrooms.”

Well I happen to agree. A man has no right in a public women’s bathroom. What I disagree on is their definition of man and woman, male and female.

It continues to sadden me that certain segments of the Christian population are spearheading this attack on the safety of transgender people. But what saddens me particularly today is the blatant disregard for truth by these Christians. Love of the truth should be one of the hallmarks of a Christian.

The word “truth” occurs 117 times in the Old Testament and 118 times in the considerably shorter New Testament. It is a major theme in the Gospel of John and John’s epistles.

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. – John 1:17

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. – John 4:24

And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. – John 8:32

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. – John 14:6

Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. – John 14:17

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. – John 16:13

Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. – John 17:17

I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. – 1st John 2:21

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him. – 1st John 3:18-19

John was not the only New Testament writer to deal with truth. Here are some verses from Paul’s epistles.

[Charity] Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; – 1st Corinthians 13:6

But [we] have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. – 2nd Corinthians 4:2

For we can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth. – 2nd Corinthians 13:8

Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. – Ephesians 4:25

(For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) – Ephesians 5:9

And still more verses from the New Testament:

Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. – James 1:18

But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. – James 3:14

Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: – 1st Peter 1:22

Now what truth does this segment of Christianity ignore, deny and dispute?

They dispute our personal testimony. Even with conservative estimates of the frequency of transgenderism, hundreds of thousands of people in the United States and millions around the world claim that this is our story, our experience, our reality. It is the testimony of little children whose lives are improved when they are allowed to live in their true gender identity. It is the testimony of people of my generation, baby boomers, who tried to repress and deny the truth about ourselves even more than our opponents do. But our identities persisted despite everything we did. It is the testimony of many fine, upstanding citizens and many whose potential is untapped because of discrimination. It is the testimony of Christians like me who have and continue to proclaim Christ, tenaciously holding onto our faith in the face of every attack we have received from those who claim to speak for the church and for Christ.

The ignore the danger that transgender people face every day because of bigotry and hatred against us. They ignore the horrific murder rate against transgender people, a rate that is most likely even higher than reported in a world where many murders are reported with the transgender identity of the victim hidden behind rejected name and gender; where there are many countries (e.g. Russia and China) where our very existence is denied. They ignore the even greater danger we would face if forced to use spaces based on our gender assigned at birth rather than our true gender.

They outright lie about transgender people being a danger. Earlier this month, a sheriff with 41 years of law enforcement experience unequivocally gave testimony to the legislature of his state that he has “never heard of a transgender person attacking or otherwise bothering someone in a restroom. This is a non-issue.” This is not a sheriff in the liberal Northeast or California. This is Leon Lott, Richland County (SC) Sheriff since 1996. His county includes the state capital, Columbia, so he serves in a populated area. In addition, any law enforcement official at his level is going to keep up-to-date on crime trends and issues outside of his own area, especially once the issue rises to the be on the front burner in his state and around the country. The plain truth is that of the jurisdictions that have passed laws protecting the right of transgender people to use bathrooms consistent with their innate gender, laws that have been in place for many years in some cases, there have been ZERO problems. In addition, when transgender people are in public, we have to use restrooms. So even in locales where such protections don’t exist, we fearfully use the restroom that corresponds to our identity. Again there have been ZERO problems.

They dispute the preponderance of learned opinion of the medical community, in the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics. They were very willing to accept their findings decades ago when these groups had little to go on in the way of research and real life experience. But with nearly three full generations of evidence at hand (and more being gathered), these respected organizations have updated their opinions and protocols based on the enlightenment gathered from their findings. Somehow in our opponents mind, without evidence, this is all a plot. Instead, they lean on discredited studies, discredited psychiatrists, rogue organizations and misrepresentation of valid studies. (I’m old enough to have lived through this before. I can remember when rock ‘n roll was supposedly a communist plot.)

They often lie and hide their true motive for waging this battle. But not always. With a debate version of three-card monte, they deftly shift from reason to reason behind their legislation and umbrage. When the moral/Biblical argument is rejected, they shift to the need to protect women as the purpose. When that argument is countered, then it becomes a matter of a right to privacy: balancing the rights of transgender people against that of cisgender women.

As far as the moral/Biblical argument, I will touch upon that in the next bullet point. As far as the protection argument, I have already shown that to be a canard. But I will take it one step further. There is a group known to be a danger primarily to women and children. They are the people on the sex offender list. Where is their hue and cry about such people being allowed to use public bathrooms? And as far as transgender protection laws opening the door for perverts to take advantage of it (recently parroted by Curt Schilling, among others), not only doesn’t it happen, they (many of whom are staunch 2nd Amendment defenders) would never apply the same rationale to strict gun control measures just because a small minority of people in our society actually do carry out horrific violence using firearms.

As far as the privacy argument, the only bathrooms I have ever seen where the stalls had no doors was in men’s locker rooms. (I hated them. I avoided using them whenever I could.) A naked cisgender woman in a public women’s bathroom would likely receive a negative response unless it was a clear case of a medical problem. I have never seen someone in a public bathroom whose genitals were in plain sight unless they were on the changing table. In spaces where nudity is more likely to be involved, the topic is more sensitive. (I never totally disrobe when I go to my gym, and there are private changing stalls if I ever would need to.) But even here, social custom is changing for reasons other than transgender. When I went to my 40th college reunion two years ago (Cornell), the dorm where my class was housed is a coed dorm. Most of the student rooms do not have private bathrooms. The common bathrooms (including showers) are also coed. This is a growing trend according to what I have read.

They distort or err on what the Bible says on the topic of transgender. I have written many blog posts countering their arguments (in conjunction with all the medical evidence that has been gathered on the nature of transgenderism). The short version is that very little can be found in the Bible on the topic and the term is not found in the Holy Scriptures. Of course, there are many modern terms (e.g. democracy and republic) that are not found there, either. The closest we can come is when Jesus describes three types of eunuchs in Matthew 19:12. The person who is born a eunuch could describe a number of situations, including someone who is transgender. Most importantly, Jesus does not condemn any of the three examples, consistent with many instances in which the new and better covenant is more inclusive than the old. And as to whether God defines us by our mind/spirit or our body parts, I have shown by many verses the preponderance of evidence that He identifies us by our mind/spirit.

Please understand that this is not a transgender vs Christianity issue, nor should it be. I and a number of friends are evidence that a person can be both. And I have many devout conservative Christians in my life who are accepting and supportive.

I know full well that there are a number of topics on which Christians are in disagreement. And there is always room for honest disagreement. But what hurts the most is the vitriol directed by this segment of the Christian population at the transgender community. And even if Christianity has come under attack from some segments of the transgender community (and I will not descend into a “who started it” black hole), Christians are not supposed to return evil for evil. We are called to a higher purpose.

Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God: Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved. – 1st Corinthians 10:32-33

When you read the many verses earlier in my post, you may have noticed a connection between truth and a loving attitude. (If not, look again.) Even if the segment of Christians who I have called out in this post earnestly believe what they are preaching about transgender people, all Christians are admonished to be “… speaking the truth in love …” (Ephesians 4:15).

I enjoy a good love story. I’m talking romance, not necessarily sex. Perhaps I love them even more after all these years because I haven’t known much romance in my life. I’m a romantic person who had very little opportunity to express that side of me, in either gender role.

The Bible has a number of beautiful love stories. Some of them also had a bit of tarnish on them. The love that Jacob had for Rachel is both beautiful and tarnished.

The eldest servant of Abraham, Jacob’s grandfather, was sent to Padanaram to find a wife for Jacob’s father, Isaac. That wife, Rebecca, would favor Jacob over his twin brother, Esau (the elder brother by a matter of a few moments). It was Rebecca who also suggested that Jacob personally go to Padanaram to find his own wife. The journey would also help Jacob escape the wrath of Esau, the one that he cheated out of a birthright and the best blessing.

It was quite a journey for Jacob, a man heretofore content to stay in the camp and dwell in tents. Most significant of all, he has a direct encounter with the Lord at Bethel and vows that if the Lord takes care of him on this journey, the Lord will be Jacob’s God.

This sets the stage for Jacob to arrive at the land of his grandfather’s people. And when he arrives, the first woman he lays eyes upon his Rachel, not unlike Abraham’s servant encountering Rebecca as the first woman he approaches. And both encounters take place at sources of water, a most precious commodity to the sheep ranchers of the Middle East.

At this time in her life, Rachel is the keeper of her family’s flock, a shepherdess. As she approaches the well, Jacob is conversing with the men about the proper procedures of sheep (cattle) ranching.

And he said, Lo, it is yet high day, neither is it time that the cattle should be gathered together: water ye the sheep, and go and feed them. And they said, We cannot, until all the flocks be gathered together, and till they roll the stone from the well’s mouth; then we water the sheep. – Genesis 29:7-8

Notice that the men of that place are not rolling away the stone. They are waiting for “they” to do it for them.

But when Rachel arrives with her flocks, Jacob himself rolls away the stone from the well and waters the sheep. (This is the reverse of the encounter between Abraham’s servant and Rebecca. At that time, Rebecca gave the servant a drink and also watered the servant’s camels.)

Having impressed Rachel with his gallant gesture, Jacob goes to Rachel and kisses her. (Okay, I’m enhancing the text here a bit, romantic that I am. But he did kiss her.) Then he identifies himself as family.

This is where the love story of Jacob and Rachel begins. And here is where it quickly gets sullied. Jacob’s Uncle Laban, father of Rachel, gets involved. Perhaps Laban has gotten wilier in his older years. Perhaps he realizes he is dealing this time with a suitor, not a servant. Perhaps both. But it soon becomes clear that Jacob, the conniver and supplanter, is from the same gene pool as Laban. However, Laban is more experienced and Jacob at first appears to have met his match.

Jacob’s bargaining skills are blinded by the stars in his eyes for Rachel. He agrees to work for seven years for Laban to obtain Rachel’s hand in marriage. And Jacob’s love for Rachel is so strong that seven years seem like only a few days for him. Ladies, could a suitor be any more devoted than that?

Here’s where Laban gets the better of Jacob. Apparently there was no formal wedding ceremony in those days where the bride and groom stood together before someone to marry them. As a wealthy man and father of the bride, Laban has a feast and then delivers the bride to the groom for their wedding night. But lo and behold, when Jacob awakes the next morning, it is Rachel’s older sister, Leah, next to him. Laban wants to marry off his oldest daughter first, and he tricks Jacob to do so.

Jacob works seven more years for Rachel, although this time Laban doesn’t make Jacob wait more than a week. Apparently Leah was entitled to a conjugal week.

Now we have the advantage of hindsight to know how the story turns out. After another seven years, Jacob wants to take his growing family and return to his home in Canaan. This time Laban is in the position of desperate bargainer. For fourteen years, he has seen how the Lord has blessed whatever Jacob does. He doesn’t want to lose Jacob and that blessing on his ranching operation. So now Jacob can name his price. And at first it looks like Jacob is a poor negotiator once again. But it gives Jacob the opportunity to fleece Laban this time. (Sorry, I couldn’t resist the pun.) And soon, Jacob has accumulated great and healthy flocks of his own to go back home with. And when he sees that Laban and his sons are starting to turn against him, Jacob decides that it is time to get out of Dodge.

Through all these machinations, Jacob eventually fathers the twelve sons who become heads of the tribes of Israel. And on the way back to meet up with Esau once again, Jacob has another encounter with the Lord (a wrestling match this time: how many people would be more afraid of their brother than the creator of all things?) that leads to him being given the name by which the nation would be known: Israel. Regardless of why God chose to have things happen this way, they happened.

It was by Leah that Levi was born, becoming the tribe of priests. Leah’s fourth son, Judah, named for her praise of the Lord, would become the ruling tribe. When peace finally comes, all the people shall be gathered unto him.

It was by Rachel that Joseph was born. He was the one who emerged from prison to save his people and forgive his brothers.

Almost all the pieces of the picture, the foreshadows, are present in this fascinating, imperfect love story. But it never comes to full fruition, never comes together in one person: not until Jesus, the lion of Judah, the son of David, the Prince of Peace, Emmanuel, the Alpha and the Omega from everlasting to everlasting.

Jesus is the Passover lamb, the perfect lamb without spot or blemish, whose sacrifice once forever saves the people from their sins. But He is also the Good Shepherd. His sheep hear His voice and follow Him.

Jesus is the priest after the order of Melchizedek, without beginning or end. But He also sits at the right hand of God the father. The scepter never departs from His hand and He shall be the righteous judge of all.

Jacob, in fathering twelve sons, was in a sense the creator of the nation. He is another picture that points to Jesus:

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. – Colossians 1:16-17

In addition to being the sheep, the shepherd (Rachel), the priest (Levi), the ruler (Judah), the savior (Joseph) who also preached to the spirits in prison (1st Peter 3:19), the sacrificial love (Jacob for Rachel) that gave His life for us while we were yet sinners and at enmity with God, the way to the Father (Bethel) and the creator (Jacob/Israel), Jesus is also the life-giving water in the story. Jesus is the living water: those who drink of Him shall never thirst. Water is also an image associated with the Word of God. Jesus is the word made flesh to have free course: those who partake of it will never hunger.

Furthermore, Jesus is the light who has come into the world. Whether as the pillar of fire by night or in the burning bush (for example), it was always God who brought the light to the scene. This is also true figuratively, as when God enlightened Joseph with the interpretation of Pharaoh’s dreams. Nothing physical in the story of Jacob, Rachel and the children of Israel could be a foreshadowing of the light that illuminates the darkness.

The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this. – Isaiah 9:2,6-7

In order for there to be the victory of Easter, there had to be the hope that was born of Christmas.

When Jesus hung on the cross of Calvary, the sun was darkened. Earthquakes tore the veil of the temple in two and opened the ground, including graves that saw their occupants come to life. A couple of days later, another earthquake rolled the stone away. No person had to do so this time.

As dawn’s light filled the sky on that Resurrection Sunday, so too did the Gospel message have valid proof. “An empty grave is there to prove my Savior lives.”

The stone has been rolled away. It is time to water the sheep. It will be time to water the sheep until Jesus returns. As Christians, we are to be the clay pots to carry the water to the troughs. Whatever else our lot in life may be, this is our first responsibility, our great commission.

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. – Mark 16:15

The past two days have been full of ups and downs. On the down side, I got my monthly maintenance bill from the new management company that has just been hired for my apartment building. It took me over two years of dealing with lawyers and assistants, foul ups by Citicorp Mortgage or my County Clerk office in recording my mortgage payoff, and foot dragging by the former management company to get my new stock certificate and even longer to get the name changed on my monthly bill. My first bill from the new management company somehow has my old name on it again.

Another minor annoyance happened with I bought something at Staples today. I am supposed to get a discount as a perk from the company that I purchase my tax software from. There was no discount. So I have to look into that on Monday.

On the plus side, I received a call this afternoon from one of my clients. He had built my previous computer for me, the one whose power supply died at the end of April. When he built it back in July 2011, he was able to take my existing computer at that time and make a virtual hard drive of it because there was some old tax software and a few other programs that would not run on Windows 7. Today he had time to move the virtual hard drive to my new computer. In some cases, I will find ways to get the data from the VHD. In other cases, I will just use the programs until I am forced to upgrade to a newer version of Windows and can no longer use them.

I also received an interesting e-mail from the woman at the Salvation Army who invited me to start attending church at the corps nearest to me. As part of an online course she is taking from a Christian college, her instructor posted a link to a blog post entitled “If God Only Made Male & Female, What About Intersex?” It appears on “Formerly Fundie: The Official Blog of Benjamin L. Corey.”

Corey admits that while he has wanted to post a blog on this subject, he is not an expert in this area. So he interviews Dr. Megan DeFranza who is an expert.

Much of the post echoes things that I have already posted (even if I do not qualify yet as an expert). I do agree with Dr. DeFranza that those who are born with mixed sex characteristics are not proof of the fall into sin. On the other hand, I do maintain that once sin and corruption entered into the world, so did birth defects. What is important to remember is that a sexual organ or gender related birth defect is no more sinful than any other birth defect.

I was generally pleased with how the connection was made between Intersex and Transgender within the constraints of a short blog post and interview. It is correct to recognize that not all Intersex individuals are Transgender. But mindful that the brain is also an organ of the body, I make note of growing evidence that many transgender individuals are also Intersex.

What intrigued me most about the post and the interview with Dr. DeFranza is that she gives a historical account of how Judaism in the Old Testament era, Jesus and early Christianity dealt with Intersex individuals. She compares part of Jesus’ statement about eunuchs in Matthew 19 to the way that Jews had special laws for those who were born with characteristics of both male and female.

So here I had just written that I needed to do more study on Matthew 19 and nine days later, God lays at least some of that in my lap. God is good all the time and all the time God is good: for that is the nature of God.

There are also links to Dr. DeFranza’s book and her blog at the end of Corey’s blog post.

For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. – Matthew 19:12

The concept known as “Eyewitness News” began in the mid-sixties. The idea spread and resulted in a major transformation of the way viewers received the news. Fifty years later, nearly every local news program uses a variation of this concept.

One of the features of eyewitness news was to have field reporters on the scene of a local story being covered. Except in rare situations, they were not the eyewitnesses, but they were able to interview people who saw or heard the action take place.

While eyewitnesses have an important place in the American justice system, eyewitness testimony was of even greater importance when the Mosaic Law was written. How much forensic science could be done that long ago? There was no way to collect DNA evidence, no video records from security cameras available. While there are some records of the Babylonians using fingerprints for signatures and other means of identification as far back as 2000 BC, no methods existed to be able to lift fingerprints from a murder weapon, a stolen object or most other items.

Safeguards were included in the Law to protect the innocent false witnesses. There are three separate verses that capital punishment cannot be meted out on the basis of only one eyewitness. Then, in Deuteronomy 19, that protection is extended to cases involving any crime, iniquity or sin. Furthermore, the law included strong consequences for those who were found to be testifying against someone with false witness, to serve as a meaningful deterrent against falsely accusing someone.

One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established. If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong; Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days; And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother; Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you. – Deuteronomy 19:15-19

Two other things were important for just verdicts to be made under such a system: the appointment of judges who were wise, discerning and honest; for the character of those giving the testimony to be well-known. In a clan-based society such as ancient Israel, with small populations and relatively low geographic mobility, both of those tasks would be easier than in modern societies that are large and relatively anonymous.

In the previous two posts, I did not dispute the assertion of God being invisible. Instead, I looked at various examples of where the effects of the actions of God are documented, reported, and give evidence of his existence and even visibility indirectly. Today, I am taking it a step further. We are going to look at reports and eyewitness accounts of direct sightings of God. Dreams and visions are not being included. Contacts with God that involve the sense of hearing only are not being included. The reports of the first three people involved were included in the Bible by oral history. The rest were directly reported by the eyewitness.

Adam and Eve: This first reference is by logical inference. In Genesis 3:8, Adam and Eve are experiencing guilt and shame for the first time as a result of eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They hear the LORD God speaking as He walks in the garden in the cool of the day. They hide from His presence. The fact that He can see them is not significant. The fact that He is physically walking among them is. In Eden, He can be seen as well as see. And Adam and Eve attempting to hide from Him in this context suggests that they saw each other regularly until they lose their state of innocence.

Abraham: Here we begin to have more directly expressed references to people who see God. In three different chapters of Genesis, there are mentions of God appearing to Abraham, the first patriarch. In Genesis 12:7, his name is still Abram. This is where God tells him that he has reached the land which the LORD had promised to show to him when Abram left his own country in response to the LORD’s command.

At the beginning of chapter 17, the LORD appears to Abram and renames him Abraham in connection with the covenant that He makes with Abraham. In verse 22, it also states that when He finished talking with Abraham, God “went up from Abraham”, further signifying that He was physically with Abraham.

The clearest account that the LORD is physically present with Abraham and that Abraham can see Him occurs at the beginning of chapter 18. Using the same verb (Heb. ra’ah), the same voice (in Hebrew it is the Niphal voice, which indicates passive or reflexive action: with this verb, the active voice means to see or perceive, the passive/reflexive voice means to appear, present oneself, be seen or be visible) as in Genesis 12 & 17, once again it says that the LORD appears to Abraham. Abraham sees Him and three men (angels) standing with Him. In response, Abraham commands a servant to fetch water so their feet can be washed. He invites them to rest and he tells Sarah to make a meal for them. In verse 13, after they ate, the LORD continues talking with Abraham, asking why Sarah laughed when she heard that she would give birth to a child.

Isaac: In Genesis 26, Isaac’s herdsmen are clashing with the herdsmen of Gerar (part of the land of the Philistines) over water wells. Finally, they find water, dig a well and are not challenged for it. That night, the LORD appears (same verb, ra’ah; same Niphal voice) to Isaac and reconfirms the covenant that He made with Abraham.

Jacob: Like his father, Isaac, there is only one recorded instance of Jacob being face to face with God. But it is one of the better known stories from the Old Testament. In Genesis 32, Jacob is returning to the land of his birth, but also to a twin brother who threatened to kill him twenty years earlier. The night before he meets Esau again, Jacob goes off by himself. In verses 24-30, Jacob suddenly was encountered by another and they engage in wrestling. Jacob initially believes this entity is a man and they wrestled to a standoff. But then we see that Jacob’s opponent has held back somewhat, for a touch of a finger threw Jacob’s thigh out of joint and withered the muscle there. (To this day, Orthodox Jews will not eat this part of the meat.) The opponent blesses Jacob but will not reveal His name. Jacob realizes that in this encounter, he has seen God face to face.

In Exodus 6:3, when God is preparing Moses to go before Pharaoh, He confirms two things about this story and the other meetings in general. He tells Moses that He appeared (again the ra’ah – Niphal combination) to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Then He tells Moses that He did not reveal His name to them, the name He revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14). (Gen. 32:24-30; also see Exodus 6:2-3 where the LORD confirms to Moses that He appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob)

Moses: With Moses, we begin the first face to face encounters that are recorded as part of the history that was written down by either the first person or a contemporary scribe. And the first eyewitness sighting involving Moses included in the Bible was a major one. In Exodus 24, God summons Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu and seventy of the elders to come to Him. While only Moses will be permitted to come close to God, the rest see Him from a distance. In verse 10, a description is given of His appearance. “And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness.” In the next verse, we are reassured that God did not harm any of those who saw Him and they went on to live their everyday lives.

In Exodus 33, Moses has recently set up the tabernacle outside the camp. God comes down to the tabernacle shrouded in a cloudy pillar. In verse 11, we are told that the LORD spoke to Moses “face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend.”

In Numbers 12, we are told that God speaking to Moses “face to face” is not unusual. In this chapter, God contrasts how He speaks to Moses with how He speaks to the rest of the prophets. The occasion is that Moses’ siblings, Miriam and Aaron, begin to speak out against Moses because he did not marry a daughter of Israel. God calls them and Moses into the tabernacle. Once again inside the cloudy pillar, He sets Miriam and Aaron straight. “And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream. My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house. With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?” (Numbers 12:6-8)

Would you think that Moses, having been accorded this great honor and privilege of seeing God face to face, would be satisfied with what he has? How typical is it of humans that regardless of how much we have, we soon want more? Going back to Exodus 33, after God has promised Moses that His presence will remain with him as Moses leads the people in the wilderness. In verse 18, Moses ups the ante. What follows is an intriguing exchange:

And he [Moses] said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory. And he [the LORD] said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy. And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen. – Exodus 33:18-23

Wait a minute! Isn’t there a contradiction here? In Exodus 33:11, we are told that God spoke to Moses “face to face”. Nine verses later, we are told that no man can see God’s face and live. Does this mean the Bible is inaccurate and cannot be trusted? I will do my best to resolve this apparent contradiction in my next post.

Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORD’S side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. – Exodus 32:26

In one of the skits in the early days of Saturday Night Live, Laraine Newman played a child psychologist. The gag was that she was not a psychiatrist who treated children. Instead, she was a little girl who practiced psychiatry.

The Bible contains twelve shorter books that are collectively called the Minor Prophets. The phrase does not refer to child prodigies in the Jewish religion whose work was canonized. Instead, it is an indication that their length is much shorter than the lengthier prophetic works such as Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

I happened to be reading through the Minor Prophets recently. I came across an interesting verse in Zechariah, the longest book of the twelve Minor Prophets. This verse, which I had never taken special notice of before, makes a clear statement about the relationship between God and how people are given their innate inner nature.

The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him. – Zechariah 12:1

The opening phrase of this verse is a common way in which another prophecy is introduced. So it is not surprising that previously I had missed the final phrase. I was focusing on the prophecy to come.

The remainder of the verse uses a writing technique that is common throughout the Bible. Rather than merely mentioning “the LORD”, it adds some descriptive phrases that reveal something about the LORD: His nature, His characteristics and/or His works.

For today’s topic, we can focus on that final phrase. Let’s look closer at the three key words in the last phrase, starting with the nouns.

“Spirit” – This is the Hebrew word “ruwach”, a word of frequent usage in the Old Testament. It can either refer to the Spirit of God or spirit of man. When referring to mankind, it can either refer to the breath of life or the inner nature and qualities of people: their abilities, temperament, emotions, moral character and so on. In the discussion of man’s creation in Genesis 1 and 2, both of these usages of “spirit” are described.

In Genesis 2:7, God breathes the breath of life into Adam, transforming a lifeless body into a living soul. Earlier in Genesis 1:27 (a key verse we will be looking at in the future), God creates man in His own image. We are going to take note of some very significant concepts here. First, we are not talking about an exact duplicate. Humans do not possess the quantity of God’s powers and abilities. (His ways are far above our ways.) But as in any copy, we display many of the same qualities. We can see, think, create, feel, and so on. Second, while God who can do anything is able to appear in corporeal form, the Bible tells us that He is spirit. Therefore, created in His image, we are given a spirit that corresponds to our human nature along with one that is the breath of life. Finally, while Genesis 2:7 clearly talks about the creation of the first man, the instructions provided in Genesis 1:28-29 indicate that this is for not only the first two people but to their descendants.

Just like Certs is both a breath mint and candy mint, “spirit” can be taken as both the breath of life and our inner nature. God gives us the breath of life and He fashions our hearts.

“Man” – “‘adam” is the Hebrew word used here, and while it can be used to refer to the first human created, it’s more frequent use in the Old Testament is mankind in general. This is fitting, for Adam was the prototype human.

A look at the verb in this phrase will give us an indication of the meaning of “man”.

“Formeth” – The Hebrew verb “yatsar” means to form, fashion or frame. When God is the subject of the sentence or phrase, it can refer to original creation, creation in general or humans at the moment of conception. Let’s look at the verb form to get a better understanding.

In this case, “yatsar” is an active participle. Active merely means that the subject of the sentence is the actor (as opposed to the passive voice, where the doer of the action is the direct object of the sentence). A participle represents an action or condition in its unbroken continuity. Therefore, without the presence of a time-related modifier, we can interpret that the formation talked about here is an ongoing activity of God. It follows that “man” in this phrase refers to mankind in general.

Thus, we have a verse that supports and strengthens the concept we saw in Psalm 139:13, that it is God who creates and gives us our innate inner nature.

Those who decry our transsexualism as being sinful try to place us in a Catch-22. On the one hand, they take a position that is in accord with that of the medical community, that if we come upon an awareness of a non-conforming gender identity late in life, it must be seriously questioned. It is more likely a mid-life crisis, an experiment, an emotional reaction to some major negative life event or delusional thinking. (Caution: ceasing denial of gender identity or trying to fix it is not the same as having an initial awareness of it.)

But then they try to lock out the portion of the lifespan most closely connected with human development, by also discounting gender awareness at an early age. Confronted with testimony of non-conforming gender feelings from a time of early awareness (let’s say at age three), they might respond with something like this: “How can you know anything that important when you are so young? I didn’t even know how to tie my shoes at that age. I thought babies came from the stork at that age.” Or they will give other similar examples of what they did not know.

The difference is that they are referring to concrete knowledge. Concrete knowledge can occur at any age. Areas of concrete knowledge that require motor skills will be easiest to learn as the child gets older, but also very difficult to learn in old age. Foreign languages, on the other hand, are much easier to learn when a person is young.

Gender identity is more abstract than concrete. We may be told that we are a boy or a girl, but those terms can refer to either biology or identity. It doesn’t take long to learn the anatomical differences, whether we asked our parents or an older sibling, played doctor or picked up information from our peers.

No one can teach us our gender identity. Not only is it abstract, it is also personal. In our early years, we get clues about gender from the cultural norms of gender expression. For the vast majority of the population that is born cisgender, they accept the gender label given to them because, based on the understanding they have acquired of gender, the label fits with their inner nature given to them in the womb. They have no need to make a conscious decision to be identified as male or female. Just ask any cisgender person when they decided to become the gender in which they live.

But for the transgender, once one becomes aware of what it means to be a boy or a girl in terms of gender identity, that person knows instinctively that it feels wrong. The exact timing of that awareness will vary depending on various factors, but the overwhelming evidence is that it does occur at an early age (on average at age 7 and almost always by age 13). And despite the buffeting of an inhospitable society against having a non-conforming gender identity, the overwhelming evidence is that it does not go away.

Our personal gender identity is part of the inner nature that God creates within us before we are born. Therefore we have it, and can know it and connect to it at any time in our life, even at an early age. It does not need to be taught to us. In fact, numerous failed attempts to try to teach gender identity (e.g., boys raised as girls after a botched circumcision) provide ample evidence that it cannot be taught.

Transgender people do not make a decision on gender identity any more than cisgender people do. The decision we have to make is when do we stop denying the gender identity that we KNOW to be true and stop trying to conform to the label affixed to our identity (mental) solely by reason of our anatomy (physical).

It is very revealing that the same Christians who discount the ability of young children to know their gender identity, have no problem accepting the salvation testimonies of people who were saved at a similar period of one’s life. I would be quickly corrected by most Christians if I discounted that someone else was born again at age seven because I wasn’t saved until I was thirty-six.

To conclude today’s post, we will take a brief look at one other verse that supports another key idea we saw yesterday in Psalm 139. This relates to Satan having a limited ability to interfere with God’s creation of us in the womb. The meaning is fairly self-evident and doesn’t require much discussion. But it is something that Christians should not lose sight of when they are rejoicing at the concept of being “fearfully and wonderfully made”. If nothing else, it will help keep us humble.

Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. – Psalm 51:5

This topic will be continued in the next post. There are a few more verses to consider.

This phrase, taken from Psalm 139, is used by some Christians as a proof text that transition for a transsexual is sin. Is that accurate? Let’s look at the whole text on the topic of in utero formation in that Psalm.

For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them. – Psalm 139:13-16

The general theme of Psalm 139 is that God knows all about us, even if we think we can hide from Him. Verses 13-16 amplify that point, showing that God even knew all about us, not only before we were born but before we were conceived.

The remaining verses (17-24) praise the greatness of God’s knowledge, and then introduce the idea that the Psalmist (attributed as David) vehemently opposes wicked people, the people who oppose God. In the last two verses of this section, connecting it back to the main theme, in humility David recognizes that there may be some wickedness in him. He invites God, who knows all about him, to search for that wickedness and lead him away from it.

Now that we have the general context, let’s take a closer look at how we were made.

In the very beginning of the text, we may be puzzled by the word “reins”. After all, we are not riding a horse in the womb. It is the Hebrew word “kilyah”. Both words can either be translated literally as kidneys, or figuratively as the seat or source of emotions, feelings or affections. It is similar to how we figuratively ascribe those same things to the heart in current usage. Considering both the context (why would just one body part be singled out?) and the fact that the Hebrew word is translated as “kidneys” 18 times in the KJV, it is reasonable to conclude that here the reference is to emotions, feelings and affections: in other words, to a non-corporeal part of our nature. We are not created tabula rasa (Latin for blank slate). According to conservative commentary, this is not a controversial translation.

So what does it mean when it says God has possessed David’s reins (and by extension possessed them for everyone)? This is the Hebrew word “qanah”. When used in connection to God, it refers to that which He originated and created. It connotes a sense of ownership. Note that at least in this verse, it does not say that God possesses our entire body, just the reins. But there is more to look at.

There is also the parallel statement that God covers us in the womb. That appears to be a straightforward statement. But some commentators try to stretch this verse to say that this means that God created our physical body. This is because while the Hebrew verb “cakak” is usually translated as cover or defend or enclose, there is an alternate meaning (used as a translation twice out of the twenty-three times the word appears in the Old Testament): to weave together.

In this context, the meaning of “cakak” appears to be most accurately translated that God protects us and hides us in the womb, not that He created our physical body. The point is moot, however. The next verse does give a clearer indication of God’s work in our physical development in utero. And this brings us to the phrase being used to declare that being transsexual and acting upon it is sinful.

It is hard to imagine any quarrel with “wonderfully” being part of the text. The idea of the gestation period culminating in birth being a miracle, a marvel or a wonder is common. The use of the word “fearfully”, however, might be troublesome for some people.

What we have to understand is that there are two types of fear in the Bible. One is positive and the other, manifested in two different ways, is negative. The Hebrew word in this passage, “yare’”, can be translated in either way. Used in this context, it is the positive type. It speaks to the awesome reverence that one has for God, recognizing how much greater He is than mankind. While it includes an understanding of God’s power and what He could do to us, it is far more encompassing than that, because a true understanding of that greatness includes all of His nature, including His compassion, His wisdom and so on. Therefore, He is worthy of all glory, honor and respect.

Immediately following this phrase is that His works are very marvelous. This connects directly to both how we are made and how very special is the birth of a baby.

So we can acknowledge who made us according to Scripture. But where and how were we made?

The next verse begins with a return to the idea that we were covered in the womb. But while we were being made in secret, we were not hidden from God. Indeed, how could we be hidden from the one who made us? Yet immediately following, there is a statement that conveys something so unexpected from what has been stated up to now, that even David describes it as curious. We were made in the lowest parts of the earth.

Now if we are made by God, wouldn’t we expect to be made in heaven? What’s going on here? Is there a contradiction? How do we explain this? These are questions that need to be answered.

The Hebrew phrase “tachtiy ‘erets” is translated literally here. The word for earth carries with it a sense that it is used in contrast with heaven. David uses the same Hebrew phrase in Psalm 63:9. It describes where those who are seeking to kill David (implicitly because he is a follower of God) will be sent after God judges them. In both cases, we are talking spiritually, not about the earth’s core.

In the New Testament (Ephesians 4:9), the KJV translators used the same phrase in English as Psalm 63:9 to describe where Jesus descended spiritually while his body was in the tomb between the crucifixion and the resurrection. It is what is referred to in the Apostle’s Creed in the phrase “He ascended into hell.”

Now let it be understood that this is not referring to the place of final, eternal destruction. Indeed, we could not have been born if our formation occurred in such a place. Revelation 20:14 states that even “death and hell” will be thrown into the place of final, eternal destruction. So there is something even worse than this reference to hell. But we should still understand that the lowest parts of the earth is not a very nice place.

So guess what, those of you Christians who accuse us of sin merely because of our transsexual identity? You were formed in the lower parts of the earth, right alongside of us!

Lest we become high-minded, let us quickly move on to the rest of the passage. Most of the last verse (also the last sentence) seems to follow from the preceding three verses. But we do have to be careful with the word “unperfect”. First of all, the prefix “un” would be “in” or “im” in modern English, as in the phrase in the Declaration of Independence “they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” Today, we would use the word “inalienable”.

In the same way, we can understand this word better as “imperfect”. But before we jump to a conclusion that this is referring to birth defects, we have to consider that in the early 17th century, “perfect” was often used as a synonym for “complete”. In fact, the lack of awareness of this causes confusion in the understanding of other parts of Scripture. But that discussion is for another time.

The Hebrew word here is “golem”. This is a word that has evolved into vastly different meaning in Jewish folklore and in Modern Hebrew. But the word, used only this one time in the Old Testament, is generally agreed by scholars to mean embryo or fetus. For whatever reason, the translators used a euphemism (perhaps for the same reason that there was a time when you could not say the word “pregnant” on television or radio and had to use a phrase like “with child”). But the meaning is the same. We were formed from nothingness to a state of being incomplete but continually fashioned until we were ready to be born.

We know that birth defects do occur. Can we derive an understanding of the cause of birth defects from this passage? To ask it another way, does God cause them or allow them?

Where does Satan have power and authority, even if it is a limited leasehold? According to the Bible, it is on and in the earth. Three different times, the Gospel of John calls Satan the “prince of this earth”. A slight variation is presented by Paul in 2nd Corinthians 4:4 where Satan is called the “god of this world” (note the lower case “g”). Satan is also referred to as either the ruler or power of darkness.

Now put this information together with Jesus talking about people being punished by being cast into “outer darkness”. Furthermore, 2nd Peter and Jude refer to the angels who rebelled against God. From these accounts, we are told that they are cast into hell and chained in (or under) darkness to be held until the end of time judgment.

Where else can one get more into the earth and away from heaven than in the lower parts of the earth? The connections are all there: hell, darkness and punishment.

Finally, let’s look at an Old Testament lesson on this subject: the book of Job. What did God grant Satan in Job 1:12 and 2:6? Limited authority to attack Job, first his possessions and family and then Job’s own body. Also, we note that Satan told God that he had been walking up and down the earth (surveying his territory, one might say). In addition, it was God, not Satan who brought up the topic of Job, and by the end of the story we can see God’s purpose in doing so.

Ultimately, the Christian has to discern what the Bible says about the cause of birth defects, God or Satan. When the question is framed that way, the inclination would be to blame Satan, not God. Seeing that Satan has some authority in this realm, that the lower part of the earth and darkness is part of his habitation, and that he is the author of harm and evil against people, the inclination is correct. Satan sticks his wicked finger into what was originally God’s perfect creation in His own image. As a result, no one is created without “spot or blemish” (i.e., imperfection).

In the next post, we are going to look at the implications of the Biblical teaching that it is God who creates the seat or cause of emotions in a person. In later posts, we will look at more verses that are used to talk about how we were made.